 Poster: A snowHead
|
Have been away and now cannot find the site in the forum listings.....have I missed a drama? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Nope - the SCGB forum is now in the Archives in the drop down under User Facilities. We felt the time had come to remove an area specifically for the SCGB. Our intention is that new threads regarding the SCGB will be treated as any other...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
skilegs, essentially the SCGB section of snowHeads was put into a place 'where the sun don't shine'.
In some ways this was understandable, because snowHeads administrators feel that the Club attracts interest, concern and discussion. A bit like one's mother. Too much interest, concern and discussion? Is the SCGB our mother?
The amusing/ironic aspect of this is that the decision to 'expel the Club' perfectly mirrors the decision to 'expel the non-members' in Feb 2004: 'If in doubt, get rid of it/them'
The two actions share a common theme: lack of consultation with the community, lack of notice. There's a new tendency on snowHeads to consign entire threads, or whole hosts of threads to oblivion - artificial action, rather than allowing things to die naturally. A relaxed attitude to freedom of speech is important. People will naturally stop discussing something like the Ski Club if there's something more interesting to chat about.
It's a matter of record that the top 10 most recent threads on the SCGB forum had all attracted discussion in the past 10 days. This was a forum of relatively high activity, with a variety of topics initiated by a variety of posters, and lots of posters taking part. In (significant?) contrast the top 10 threads on the Snowboarding forum have - almost without exception - had no postings for a fortnight. And no one in their right mind would suggest binning the Snowboarding section.
The challenge for snowHeads is not how to consign discussion to the graveyard, but how to keep this place a vibrant, fresh, snow-related discussion arena. People will be more inclined to post fresh stuff on snowHeads if they feel a sense of ownership and involvement ... also in decision-making.
I'm not convinced that we need 'editors', on top of 'administrators' and 'moderators'. Next, we'll have a 'human resources department' and 'logistics division'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| Quote: |
I'm not convinced that we need 'editors', on top of 'administrators' and 'moderators'. Next, we'll have a 'human resources department' and 'logistics division'.
|
To supplement the lawyers working on copyright and T&Cs
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Neat point, Frosty
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, your understanding seems a little blinkered, but not without value.
As I see it, having a main section discussion on here about the SCGB is like having part of the front page of the Times dedicated to talking about the Gruniad, or having Rossignol dedicating part of their website to Salomon.
Perhaps the Times/Gruniad is a closer similie, as you may well find within the Times reporting on things which have happened at the other paper, or relating to it, but you certainly won't find a section dedicated to it. And that is where snowHeads is now, not wanting to isolate one section, nor wanting to exclude other clubs, but to include all, in all discussions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David , I feel that the mods are just trying to keep things simple. If by moving the SCGB it means less acrimony and hassle then I would have to agree with the move.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Fox, I think what you've written is perfectly valid.
A better approach would be to pull the SCGB forum back onto the front page but rename it 'Ski Clubs and Other Animals' of something along those lines. snowHeads is a self-styled 'global ski club'. There's the Midland Ski Club (very interesting) ... and a number of other regional ski clubs, Scottish Ski Club etc. etc. I don't have a problem with saying that the SCGB should no longer be the specific neon-lit centre of attention.
In essence, though, clubs are interesting ... and this is one of them!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, I think that you're suffering from selective recall when you say
| Quote: |
| The two actions share a common theme: lack of consultation with the community, lack of notice. |
As I believe that the subject had been discussed in suggestions and requests on more than one occassion, with the general feeling that this was a good move.
Perhaps you were distracted by the rivetting discussion about terms and conditions at the time? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
Fox, I think what you've written is perfectly valid.
A better approach would be to pull the SCGB forum back onto the front page but rename it 'Ski Clubs and Other Animals' of something along those lines. snowHeads is a self-styled 'global ski club'. There's the Midland Ski Club (very interesting) ... and a number of other regional ski clubs, Scottish Ski Club etc. etc. I don't have a problem with saying that the SCGB should no longer be the specific neon-lit centre of attention.
In essence, though, clubs are interesting ... and this is one of them! |
David, yes, that would be a possibility, but why dedicate a section just to ski clubs? If there is something specific that a club is doing, then it would be good to promote it, or discuss it, in the relevant part of snowHeads - e.g. if the SCGB is doing a trip, then put it in snowEvents, if the Midland Ski Club are having a race, then put it in snowSports, that way it will reach more people, who might otherwise not go to a clubs section.
Last year, the EpicSki Academy wasn't put in a seperate section, but was included in the relevant sections. I think that is the better way to do things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| The amusing/ironic aspect of this is that the decision to 'expel the Club' perfectly mirrors the decision to 'expel the non-members' in Feb 2004: 'If in doubt, get rid of it/them' |
Hardly, SCGB members are still welcome here and we are still talking about the club after all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...and any snowHead can go and read the old posts in the archive and any snowHead can start a thread on topics relating to the SCGB. (membership of snowheads is free)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Wear The Fox Hat wrote: |
| I think that is the better way to do things. |
I agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Wear The Fox Hat, marc gledhill, Ian Hopkinson, rob@rar.org.uk, yup.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Nick Zotov wrote: |
| Wear The Fox Hat, marc gledhill, Ian Hopkinson, rob@rar.org.uk, yup. |
I agree as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| boredsurfin wrote: |
| Nick Zotov wrote: |
| Wear The Fox Hat, marc gledhill, Ian Hopkinson, rob@rar.org.uk, yup. |
I agree as well. |
And me!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Me 2
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
I would have preferred to keep the forum - but it's no big deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
DavidS, I'd be interested to know why you think that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Kramer, was first there again - it was discussed to the point of removal - best not reawaken it 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with DavidS. It should still be a part of the site though I was strongly opposed to its previous position on the 'public' side of SH. A 'clubs' section would seem a logical step. There are many clubs and having a place for them to contact us with, events and anything else interesting, thus becoming part of the SH community (unless we are intent on repeating past mistakes by becoming a club in its standardised formal form) is a logical step.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Hopkinson, I'm a SCGB member (just) - and thought that some of the discussions over here were useful. I haven't used the club's own forums since MO day - when I was held up by the Forum administrator as a prime example of why open access could not be allowed to continue.
I also wrote this a few weeks back
| DavidS wrote: |
| A conspiracy theorist might wonder whether some SCGB members are engaged in a campaign to get the forum removed... |
I agree with masque that a clubs section would be a good idea. I also liked the idea of a mountains section - and would support a bit of spring cleaning to provide better grouping of the existing boards.
None of these are strongly held opinions though...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| DavidS wrote: |
| I haven't used the club's own forums since MO day - when I was held up by the Forum administrator as a prime example of why open access could not be allowed to continue. |
Ooooh how exciting - what did you say??!! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps for the sake of Entente Cordial both SH and SCGB should have corresponding links to each others homepage. Similarly individual ski club websites could link to each other - truly a piste-wide web. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| rob@rar.org.uk wrote: |
| Wear The Fox Hat wrote: |
| I think that is the better way to do things. |
I agree. |
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| Cathy Coins wrote: |
| DavidS wrote: |
| I haven't used the club's own forums since MO day - when I was held up by the Forum administrator as a prime example of why open access could not be allowed to continue. |
Ooooh how exciting - what did you say??!! |
Something sarcastic and childish as far as I recall - for which I was duly slapped by Laura.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| IncogSkiSno wrote: |
BTW does SCGB have a forum for sH's ?  |
No - just disparaging references...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| IncogSkiSno wrote: |
| ..........BTW does SCGB have a forum for sH's ? |
Nope.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
DavidS, Nick Zotov, Sorry it was a rhetorical question - I am myself a member.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I'd be opposed to the SCGB having a prominent position within a Clubs Section and also that we look very carefully at the directory structure to make it as uncontroversial informative and non-combative as possible.
I've been thinking a lot about the various confrontations that have been floating about over the last couple of years and wondered if we should consider a 'Weekly Debate' section where anyone can post a controversial or otherwise subject for debate all can respond, but the thread only lasts for 7 days and is then locked and voted on. and the tread then gets archived. A set of debate forum rules can do something about the occasional burst of bile that seeps into some subjects and we can have constructive discussion about anything that concerns us. Of course, if no one gives a crap about what you think . . . it'll just fade away after 7 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
Does anyone know if the Protestant churches have a special area for discussing the Roman Catholic Church?
No...?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Chris Bish, They certainly do . . . and vice versa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Masque wrote: |
| Chris Bish, They certainly do . . . and vice versa. |
Yes, but I don't believe it's on the front page of their bulletins.
(or has the shorter catechism changed recently to "Man's chief end is to glorify God and enjoy His precepts forever, and have a natter about the Roman Catholic church")
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wear The Fox Hat, I think you take my (somewhat ironic) point.
They can go their way, we can go ours.
And let's all go in peace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Wear The Fox Hat, Ah, but what colour are your pants?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
